Michigan Senate Bill SB0393

Michigan 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 6/15/23
• Refer: 6/15/23
• Report Pass: 10/31/23
• Refer: 10/31/23
• Report Pass: 11/1/23
• Engrossed: 11/2/23
• Refer: 11/2/23
• Report Pass: 2/22/24

Caption

Environmental protection: other; environmental science advisory board; eliminate. Repeals pt. 26 of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.2601 - 324.2611).

Impact

The potential impact of SB 393 on state laws is significant, as it proposes to remove established guidelines and frameworks that govern environmental science practices and advisory roles within Michigan's environmental regulations. The repeal of Part 26 may lead to gaps in environmental oversight, particularly in sectors previously monitored by these advisory boards. By eliminating this part of the Act, the bill indicates a shift towards potentially less stringent environmental governance.

Summary

Senate Bill 393 aims to amend the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act by repealing Part 26, which concerns environmental science advisory boards and other associated regulations. The bill seeks to eliminate existing provisions concerning the management and oversight duties of these advisory boards. The proponents of this bill argue that this repeal is necessary to streamline the regulatory process surrounding environmental protection in Michigan.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB 393 appears to be mixed, with support primarily from those who believe that reducing governmental oversight could promote economic development and simplify regulatory constraints. Conversely, opponents express concerns that the removal of these advisory boards could undermine environmental protection efforts, leading to potential harm to natural resources. This divided sentiment reflects broader debates on the balance between environmental regulation and economic interests.

Contention

A notable point of contention regarding SB 393 is the ongoing debate over the necessity and effectiveness of environmental advisory boards in ensuring sound environmental management. Supporters of the repeal argue that such boards are outdated and create unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles, while critics contend that their elimination could weaken important safeguards against environmental degradation. The discussions around this bill are emblematic of the larger political divisions regarding environmental policy and regulatory approaches in Michigan.